America

Employers can’t be push pregnant workers out of their jobs- US Supreme Court

Pregnant women enjoy the same civil liberties — including the rights to make decisions about their own health care, to equal treatment under the law, and to conduct their lives according to what they believe is best for themselves and their families — guaranteed to us all.

In a landmark judgement the US Supreme Court recently ruled in favor of Peggy Young in Young v. UPS, case brought by the former United Parcel Service delivery driver.

Young alleged that her employer, UPS, violated the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 by forcing her onto unpaid leave while she was pregnant rather than providing temporary accommodations as it does for other groups of workers who need them.

The court disagreed with the Fourth Circuit’s 2013 decision that UPS was not required under the PDA to provide Young the same accommodations afforded to other workers temporarily unable to perform their regular duties, and sent the case back to the lower courts.

The court held that Peggy Young can prevail in the lower courts if she can show that she was denied accommodations given to others similar in their ability to work, and that her employer’s policies impose a significant and unjustified burden on pregnant workers. She can make that showing by providing evidence that the employer accommodates “a large percentage of non-pregnant workers while failing to accommodate a large percentage of pregnant workers.”

“Today’s Supreme Court decision is an important victory for Peggy Young, and for many other pregnant workers, because it makes clear that employers can’t continue pushing pregnant workers out of their jobs while providing accommodations for other, non-pregnant workers,” said Lenora Lapidus, director of the ACLU’s Women’s Rights Project. “Nonetheless, Congress should pass the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, which will further enshrine the principle that pregnant workers should not have to choose between their jobs and a healthy pregnancy.”

Young requested a light duty assignment after her doctors recommended that she not lift more than 20 pounds during pregnancy. Under UPS policy, this accommodation would have been made available to workers temporarily unable to perform their regular tasks because of on-the-job injuries, disabilities covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act, or loss of their commercial drivers’ licenses. Instead of making reasonable accommodations, UPS put Young on unpaid leave with no medical coverage, just when she needed it most to prepare for the cost of having a baby.

The ACLU has long fought against these discriminatory practices in the courts and in the legislatures. After the Fourth Circuit ruled in Young’s case, the ACLU took a lead role in helping to pass legislation in Maryland protecting pregnant workers from discrimination. States and cities across the country have since acted on a bipartisan basis to enact such protections.

Related Posts

Tevon Harris’s modus operandi was simple. He would contact young girls through social media and offer them modelling jobs with lots of money. Later they mere made to have sex with Harris and other customers. The girls were then photographed and their images posted in online ads for prostitution. Even the money they earned was pocketed by Harris who used violence and intimidation to make them cooperate. They were also not allowed to speak to their friends or relatives and kept without food for days if they did not cooperate.

FDI in armament technology and production of arms for exports cannot be an end in itself as every policy decision is required to be linked to the needs of the people. Relying on an ad hoc decision making process, without a carefully considered overall perspective on the implications of FDI in armament technology, is not a substitute for building a comprehensive plan and robust policy for the country’s inclusive growth, development and security.

CIA has learned many lessons from this new chapter in its history. In a rare televised press conference at Langley, the CIA Chief acknowledged that torture techniques used by some of his officers made matter of terrorism worse and provided "a breeding ground for more terrorism".